Bp. Fellay: At the time, I wrote to Pope Francis, and we prepared a text to wake up the cardinals, a letter from our three bishops. But, I will not say “unfortunately”--that would not be the right word—but four cardinals took the initiative just before we were about to send the letter. That's why there was not much noise about it because it was already done. So our letter just remains in a drawer.
http://tradcatknight.blogspot.jp/2018/01/the-filing-cabinet-of-bp-fellay.html
ROME (ChurchMilitant.com) - In a new interview, Cdl. Walter Brandmüller addressed the confusion in the Church today, saying, "The Lord was and is still today in the boat — even though He seems to be asleep."
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/dubia-cdl.-brandmueller-the-lord-seems-to-be-asleep
http://www.traditionalcatholicpriest.com/2018/01/05/open-apostasy-vatican-fr-jerome-guest-post/
Open Apostasy In The Vatican – Fr. Jerome Guest Post
Here is another post from Fr. Jerome –
The state of the Church right now is the fault of conservatives, not liberals. Vatican II was hijacked by liberals 50 years ago only because conservatives were sleepyand trusting of men. And this continues in Rome today to a worse extent.
Yes, there will always be liberals who hate Christ, but what is different now from the rest of Church history is that Christ’s closest clerical friends are too afraid to fight for His Church. No, the four Cardinals of the Dubia are nothing like St. Athanasius or St. Maximus the Confessor or St. Nicholas or St. John Chrysostom.
The saints had no need to “hear out” heretics in a “pastoral” manner. There will always be heretics, but that is not the problem. The problem is the want of saints. The saintly bishops of the first 500 years of the Church revealed the poisonous words of heretics, gentle as they be, were sent into exile, and then they were vindicated (usually in their lifetime) for their reckless courage. I see no reckless courage today in the face of open heresy. And this is why the open heresy of four years ago in the Vatican has become an open apostasy in the highest ranks in the Church.
Let me remind the readers of three definitions:
1) Heresy is the denial of even one part of Divine Revelation
2) Apostasy is a full renunciation of the unique and redemptive act of Jesus Christ.
3) Soteriology is the study of salvation.
The false prophet on the Chair of Peter is now espousing a soteriology that is little different from a Unitarian Universalist. We have full apostasy now in the Vatican…and not a single bishop is willing to say anything against full and outright soteriological apostasy? No. Rather, our most “courageous” prelates flex their muscles against a single sexual line in Amoris Laetitia.
This is not courage. It is not courage that no one questions a clearly-forced Papal-resignation of Pope Benedict XVI. It is not courage that no one (except a retired courageous bishop in Texas) questions a tampered-Conclave to elect our current false-prophet.
Like the Republicans in the 1980s in the USA who promised to end abortion in order to keep their office (but did very little) I fear these “conservative” bishops are doing as much damage to the Church as the gay Cardinals who hate the Church and are overturning every point of Our Faith. Why? Why are the former like the latter?
For not resisting with courage. If any bishop should ever read this, let me remind you that the Holy Spirit in the book of the Apocalypse places through the Apostle John cowards in the same lake of fire as murderers:
“But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.”—Apocalypse 21:8 ESV
I for one: resist. I renounce the open apostasy in the Vatican in the name of Jesus Christ and I beg the wrath of St. Peter and St. Paul to stop this blasphemy of the Eternal City and this mockery of Jesus Christ’s own apostolic succession. I will reveal my name when I am ready to lose my faculties as a priest in current good standing and go into exile, but for now, I resist in the name of Jesus Christ.
都合悪いことは神に確認しないでおくのが人の世の常
We’ll examine the contents of that letter in a moment, but the reason he did so is what particularly fascinates me about this story. In his interview with Crux, he indicates that the need to say something had been on his mind for a while, but he was conflicted. So he asked for a sign from God — not just any sign, but something incredibly specific:
Weinandy said his decision to write the letter was not easy, and resulted from what he regards as a moment of inspiration.
It came last May, he said, when he was in Rome for a meeting of the International Theological Commission. He said he spent two different sessions in prayer at St. Peter’s Eucharistic Chapel, struggling to decide if he should speak up. In the middle of a sleepless night, he said, he basically gave God an ultimatum.
“If you want me to write something, you have to give me a clear sign,” Weinandy recalls saying. “Tomorrow morning, I’m going to Saint Mary Major’s to pray, and then I am going to Saint John Lateran. After that, I’m coming back to Saint Peter’s to have lunch with a seminary friend of mine.”
“During that interval, I must meet someone that I know but have not seen in a very long time, and would never expect to see in Rome at this time. That person cannot be from the United States, Canada or Great Britain. Moreover, that person has to say to me, ‘Keep up the good writing’.”
Sure enough, Weinandy said, exactly that happened the next day, in a chance meeting with an archbishop he’d known a long time ago but not seen for over twenty years, who congratulated him for a book on the Incarnation and then said the right words, “Keep up the good writing.”
“There was no longer any doubt in my mind that Jesus wanted me to write something,” Weinandy said. “I also think it significant that it was an Archbishop that Jesus used. I considered it an apostolic mandate.”
Leading theologian: change canon law to correct papal errors
Fr Aidan Nichols said that Pope Francis's teaching had led to an 'extremely grave' situation
A prominent theologian has proposed reforming canon law to allow a pope’s doctrinal errors to be established.
Fr Aidan Nichols, a prolific author who has lectured at Oxford and Cambridge as well as the Angelicum in Rome, said that Pope Francis’s exhortation Amoris Laetitia had led to an “extremely grave” situation.
Fr Nichols proposed that, given the Pope’s statements on issues including marriage and the moral law, the Church may need “a procedure for calling to order a pope who teaches error”.
The Dominican theologian said that this procedure might be less “conflictual” if it took place during a future pontificate, rather as Pope Honorius was only condemned for error after he had ceased to occupy the chair of Peter.
Newchurch Theologian Wants to Change Newcanon Law
To Deal with Heretical Newpopes Like Francis-Bergoglio
From: The TRADITIO Fathers
Pope Honorius I Was Excommunicated
By the Third Oecumenical Council of Constaninople
Now a Leading Newchurch Dominican Theologian
Has Called out Francis-Bergoglio
For His Heretical Teachings in Amoris Laetitia (The Joy of Sex)
And Has Called for a Change in Newchurch Canon Law
To Provide for "a Procedure for Calling to Order a [New]pope
Who Teaches Error" In Order to "Dissuade [New]popes
From Any Tendency to Doctrinal Waywardness"
The Dogmatic First Vatican Council Taught
That Even Popes Could Fall into Heresy
Dom Aidan Nichols, a leading Newchurch Dominican theologian, on August 18, 2017, broke his silence and publicly denounced Francis-Bergoglio's heretical teaching on marriage as leading to a "very grave situation" and has proposed a change in Newcanon Law to correct Newpopes' doctrinal errors. He was a signatory to a private letter of 45 presbyters and theologians to Bergoglio in 2016 to the College of Newcardinals requesting that they demand Bergoglio to correct his heresies on marriage.
Many Catholics are unaware that in 1983 the Unsaint JPII-Woytyla substituted for Catholic Canon Law a Protestantized version, which is not Catholic. It is this anti-Catholic version to which Dom Nichols is referring. Dom Nichols predicted that there is as a result now in Newchurch "a danger of possible schism" but that it was not as immediate a danger as "the spread of a moral heresy."
Fr. Nichols was specifically referring to the heresies contained in Francis-Bergoglio's March 19, 2016, document Amoris laetitia (The Joy of Sex) He said that Newchurch needs "a procedure for calling to order a [New]pope who teaches error" in order to "dissuade [New]popes from any tendency to doctrinal waywardness." He referred to the case of Pope Honorius (625-658), who was excommunicated by the Third Oecumenical Council of Constantinople (680-681) retroactively as a heretic who had taught heresy.
Honorius was only one of several heretical popes in the history of the Church. For further information, click on POPELIM: Limitations of Papal Authority to Change Sacred Tradition, From the Writings of Roman Catholic Popes, Councils, Saints, and Theologians in the TRADITIO Network's Library of Files: FAQs and Traditional Apologetics department.
Dom Nichols enumerated several of Francis-Bergoglio's heresies.
- Bergoglio would permit the sacrilegious "communion" of bigamists (although technically Newchurch has not had the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist since 1968, when the Protestantized presbyterate and the invalid New Mess were instituted).
- Bergoglio would introduce a "a previously unheard-of state of life. Put bluntly, this state of life is one of tolerated concubinage."
- Bergoglio would teach that "actions condemned by the law of Christ can sometimes be morally right or even, indeed, requested by God" and instead teach the heresy that some divinely-condemned acts are not always morally wrong.
- Bergoglio would reject the dogmatic Council of Trent's anathema of the opinion that "the commandments of God are impossible to observe even for a man who is justified and established in grace" and instead teach the heresy that it is not always possible or even advisable to follow God's moral law. [Some information for this Commentary was contributed by the U.K. Catholic Herald.]
http://www.traditio.com/comment/com1708.htm#170821
There is ample precedent in the history of the Church for denouncing a pope as a heretic. The first was related by St. Paul in his Epistle to the Galatians (2:11/DRV et seq.) in which the Saint denounced Peter in front of the Council of the Apostles for falling into heresy.
In a new interview, Cardinal Raymond Burke has said it is “now necessary” that a declaration be issued on key areas of Church doctrine that are “not clear” in Pope Francis’ teachings.
The Holy Father will then be “obliged to respond” in order to bring clarification to those teachings, he said.
The cardinal told The Wanderer newspaper Aug. 14 that such a formal act of correction has not been invoked “for several centuries” and until now it has never been used “in a doctrinal way.”
But he said it would be “quite simple” and involve presenting on the one hand the “clear teaching of the Church” and on the other “what is actually being taught by the Roman Pontiff.” The teaching in question in particular relates to doctrinal matters published in the Pope's 2016 apostolic exhortation, Amoris laetitia.
“If there is a contradiction, the Roman Pontiff is called to conform his own teaching in obedience to Christ and the Magisterium of the Church,” the cardinal explained, adding that a “formal declaration” would be submitted to the Holy Father to which he would be “obliged to respond.”
：：：
He also stressed the importance of “discriminating mercy” which “distinguishes the sin from the sinner.”
“An expression of love toward the sinner makes it very clear that the sin he or she is committing is absolutely repulsive and must be stopped. Yet, the tendency is to respond with a false sense of mercy,” the cardinal said.
“If we are not conscious of our sin and repenting of it, what does it mean to ask for God’s mercy? Why are we asking for God’s mercy if we have not sinned? So it is as simple as that. Otherwise, mercy is a meaningless term. We must admit the sin we have committed is wrong, that we are deeply sorry for it, and that we are asking for God’s mercy.”
http://throwthebumsoutin2010.blogspot.jp/2017/08/cardinal-burke-outlines-formal.html
My source told me that the one who has appealed to the four cardinals to be prudent was [Gerhard Ludwig] Müller, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. In fact, in the meeting that the four had, Muller was present too. The call for prudence about the publication of the correction rests on something that Müller said at that meeting: “You have to choose the lesser evil. If you publish the correction, you risk schism.”
(Fra. Cristoforo, “ECCO IL MOTIVO per cui i 4 Cardinali hanno deciso di NON procedere con la correzione formale”, Anonimi della Croce, Mar. 20, 2017; our translation.)
http://novusordowatch.org/2017/03/cardinal-muller-formal-correction-risks-schism/